From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,c83229a21d53b2b3 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Al Christians Subject: Re: Long Float Error from Gnat Date: 1998/11/01 Message-ID: <363C8EAA.57DBA71C@easystreet.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 407272739 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <3638F49C.E90A401E@easystreet.com> <363A49F3.DB0A0196@easystreet.com> <71fob8$r2e$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <363B6EBF.C67DA0DC@easystreet.com> <71hul6$bjf$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: news14.ispnews.com 909937746 206.103.35.7 (Sun, 01 Nov 1998 11:29:06 EDT) Organization: Trillium Resources Corporation MIME-Version: 1.0 NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1998 11:29:06 EDT Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1998-11-01T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: dewarr@my-dejanews.com wrote: > > GNAT chat is also not the place to post bug reports. We never take bug reports > from either CLA or from chat, only from explicit mail to report@gnat.com. Sure. I didn't expect that I was going to report a bug via GNAT chat. When I wrote my posting here, I had not concluded that I had even found a bug. I was only posting something curious and Ada-related that I did not understand. This newsgroup seemed to me the most likely place for me to learn more about what I was seeing. That worked. I have not written a bug report on this item -- one of the first responses I got was "wait until 3.11 comes out, then submit a bug report". Another was "it's fixed". Given that reply, I don't I will submit a bug report. Even not given that reply, I don't know if I would have submitted a bug report. As I remember reading it, probably second hand, so correct me if I'm wrong, ACT's customers pay not less than $600/month to be ACT's customers, and I pay nothing. I expect that at least some of them read this newsgroup and would see my posting. They obviously have some far more significant interest than me in having GNAT programs produce correct results. If they can live with a system with this flaw that only shows up for numbers of magnitude around 1E-30 and less, and if none of those customers with their CMM software processes have found this problem that I unearthed within about 1 month of starting to use GNAT day-to-day for real work in my 1-person operation, and if none of them would ask ACT to fix it, who am I to complain? Al